On 30-10-2012 22:33, Bill Meahan wrote:
On 10/30/2012 01:39 PM, Hans Hagen wrote:
sure, till one replaces bash by something non-bash-ish while the user
still thinks he's running bash (i always fear the moment that someone
decides that swapping the 'cp' arguments without renaming the command
is a good idea -)
(i wouldn't be surprised if it can backfire badly in more complex
situations)
Hans
My background is in "commercial" Unix and I've had situations like
having to administer an HP box (HPUX) a Sun box (Solaris) a Teradata box
(some flavor or other of SYS V R4) some BSD and Linux on the same day.
:) Only thing I could count on was the "official" AT&T Bourne shell syntax.
I use ksh93 (the AT&T distribution) as my login shell.
This assumes control over the login shell as well as control over what
the launchers of system processes use. I must admit that till now I
always assumed some stability in this, which is probably okay as long as
one sticks to one specific distribution (of linux).
I think that the main problem is that #! /bin/sh can mean anything
(although in your case I suppose you expect it to be the bourne shell).
So the question is, should the scripts that come with context (like the
installer) be explicit and become #! /bin/bash ?
Hans
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
| www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the
Wiki!
maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________
